The Process of Redefining Cultural Identity in

Societies in Transition
Case Study: Historical Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Nina Ugljen-Ademović
Professor, Department of Architectural Design
University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Architecture, UNSA, AFS
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
nnug@bih.net.ba ninau@af.unsa.ba

Elsa Turkusić
Senior Teaching Assistant, Department of Architectural Design
University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Architecture, UNSA, AFS
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
elsat@af.unsa.ba

Senka Ibrišimbegović
Teaching Assistant, Department of Architectural Design
University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Architecture, UNSA, AFS
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
senkaibrisimbegovic@gmail.com senkai@af.unsa.ba

Abstract—The paper is based on the research how variable local
sociopolitical constellations make almost daily changes of the
appearance of the urban context, thus integrating its concrete
intentions into emerging architecture which has long-term influence
on creation of a (specific) cultural identity. Premise of this paper is
that the process of construction of cultural identity is
multidimensional and complex.
In this context, analytical model is constructed for the purpose of
answering burning questions - in which way architecture and urban
forms influence shaping of cultural identities of societies in
transition and how this cultural identity becomes locally and
globally sustainable. The focus of the paper is society of Bosnia and
Herzegovina and three existing tendencies, of unequal intensity and
influence, in redefining this cultural identity. Historical Museum of
Bosnia and Herzegovina is an living example of those tendencies, of
the positive, but the least present, one.
Keywords- architecture, urban context, identity of a place,
cultural identity, local, global
I. INTRODUCTION
Contemporary theoretical concepts in architecture are almost
unimaginable without new perceptions of the importance of
cultural identity. Cultural identity of certain specific regions
has implications on its architecture. In this way it represents
inevitable and continuous process of the permanent labeling of
the place in the terms of the symbolic identification with the
territorial and memory significance.
After several decades, repeatedly revised Frampton's
“critical regionalism” still seems to be vital although
contemporary social concepts also have significant influence.
Today it is clearly difficult to pursue with the original idea of
Critical Regionalism. Contemporary urban areas are visually
ambivalent and hardly coincide with determined cultural
patterns. In this manner we witness frequent reinterpretations
of the term 'place', different views and re-questioning within
divergent modes of intervention in space, as well as presence
of the continuously changeable concepts of modernization in
its widest sense. Supporting the positions promoting the
significance of the cultural identity and the role of
architecture and opposing the negative trends within the
global tendencies that can be perceived as a threat, in this
occasion, rather different perspective on this issue is
presented. This perspective opposes seeing only processes of
globalization as responsible for the lack of visual recognition
and vitality of cultural identity in the architecture.
Namely, varying local sociopolitical constellations
almost on a daily basis cause change in the appearance of the
urban context thus integrating its concrete intentions into
emerging architecture which further has long-term influence
on creation of specific cultural identity
Today, this very sensitive question deserves careful
attention, especially in small countries in which
transitional processes are still very much present.
The problem persists when present contexts are not able to
generate new architecture.
In this ambience it is necessary to find answers for the actual
questions – how to determine the identity of certain space and
in which way architecture and urban forms influence the
shaping the cultural identity and, finally, how specific cultural
identity becomes locally and globally sustainable.
II. CULTURAL IDENTITY AS A PROCESS
This research we begin with Charles Correa's deffinition
according to which identity is not a self-concious act but
process, thus spontaneously developing and lasting. This
deffinition could be supplemented with that, within recent
social movements, cultural identity is not longer perceived
in singularity. Today it is indeed the unity of different
dynamically changeable identities. Also, this process could
be interpreted as an aiming to label a certain place and
moment – here and now.
Importance of the architecture in this process is
invaluable. Architecture visualize values of a culture by its
formal sensations. Hence, it is important to understand the
architecture as a powerful tool in determining the historical
place of the individuals or community transferring ideas
and setting the criteria.
That characteristic guides us to perceive developement
and upgrade of the cultural identity from two positions –
through both the implications of place and time. Today,
situation is globally clear. It is evident that developement
of the cultural identity is strongly marked with
developement of post-national societies, and cultural
pluralism becomes res facti. That is why our attitudes have
to become more tolerant and allow architecture its
elementary right to reflect the time, i.e. presence.
New global culture is then perceived as paradigm of
technological and generally scientific achievements,
which, in terms of identity and meaning, contribute to
existence of Auge's 'anthropological place' as a
consequence of a cultural process rich in history, identity
and interaction. However, we also witness that local issues
show its other side. The aforementioned transition present
in Bosnia and Herzegovina has marked transition from
social to private ownership in all segments of life and also
marked the space and its architectural articulation.
After its fragmentary occurrence, it got quickly
transformed into a phenomenon demanding critical
redefinition of the architectural processes and, thus,
redefinition of the cultural identity.
III. THE ROLE OF ARCHITECTURE IN
UNDERSTANDING AND REDEFINING CULTURAL
IDENTITY
We perceive cultural identity of Bosnia and Herzegovina
through a reflection on its historical and geographical
position.
Situated between the civilizations of the Occident and
the Orient, and the culture of continental Europe and the
Mediterranean, the country is being subjected to a radical
transformation of its socio-political organization and
frequent new rapidly established influences.
In specific complexity of its always peripheral location
against major cultural and political centers, the cultural
identity of Bosnia and Herzegovina was created out of its
sources and opens to the various influences as well as
reshapes, embodying social awareness. The specificity of
such a cultural context emerges with quality architecture,
within which "modern heritage" represents an intriguing
area of research and evaluation.
We start from the understanding that changing processes
of modernization and architecture that followed them until
the early 1990s, are an inseparable part of our cultural
heritage, rich with positive experiences, and are today
unjustly neglected. At this point, the process of forming
cultural identity loses the aforementioned characteristics, and
becomes a medium of certain scheduled interests. Duality of
returning to national-oriented society and unselective
dictatorship of the capital almost excludes the values
achieved by the architectural modernization processes. In this
manner, post-socialist modern society tends to erase valuable
historical architectural examples, but the consequences are
far more complex – the links in the continuity of our cultural
identity may disappear.
This study has the aim to try to provide answers for the
questions raised in the Introduction, but represent a peculiar
appeal for awakening the conscience on significance of
architecture of our past, on local level and further.
Redefining the attitudes towards this kind of architectural
legacy will gradually lead to redefining the term of the
cultural identity what will be presented in the other part of
this study.
Finally, considering the issue of cultural identity and its
timeless role of architecture, we cite Louis Sullivan:
„Nothing more clearly reflects the status and the tendencies
of a people than the character of its buildings. They are
emanations of the people; they visualize for us the soul of our
people. They are as an open book. And by this sign the
tendency today is disquieting. It cannot logically accept
responsibility for one class of acts and deny responsibility for
others; for a people is an aggregated individual, to be held in
the balance of fate morally and responsibly for all his acts.“1

Creation of such socially responsible architecture would

contribute to necessary redefining of the architectural
processes if we aim to build buildings, which respect the past
and open new visions of the space for the future.

IV. MULTIPLE PROCESSES OF REDEFINING THE

CONCEPT OF CULTURAL IDENTITY

According to Manuel Castells collective identity is

constructed through a process with the participation of (some)
Figure 1. International University Sarajevo, Sarajevo
actors compelled by various reasons which are rooted in social
reality. Thus, the structure of construction of each identity
consists of the following questions: WHO, HOW, WHAT and
WHY does it create? Since the architecture reflects the social
situation, it often becomes subject of the political and
ideological influences, but on the other hand it certainly does
not have the power to change society (which is especially
shown during the twentieth century). It is certain that
architecture and society build a complex dialectic relationship,
in which architecture takes socially responsible role.

Within the society of Bosnia and Herzegovina we can

single out three current tendencies in the construction of
redefining cultural identity, unequal by their intensity and
impact. ”Fig.1”

The first is political-ideological oriented and starts from

primordial notions of identity construction- while rejecting
modern heritage or valorization of the socialist period
architecture. The aim is to create a homogeneous cultural
identity as an element of social stability and a sense of
belonging in the transition process. ”Fig.2” So constructed
cultural identity does not really happen to be neither
evolutionary nor conservative but fake, artificial and passive.
Figure 2. Hotel Termag, Jahorina mountain
Second tendency is based on a market-oriented
relationship of architecture and society, which unfortunately
does not attempt any innovative or even neutral architectural
forms that could contribute to the cultural context. ”Fig.3” On
the contrary, visually dominant and spectacular aesthetics of
the architectural expression characterize this tendency. In the
short term it creates a whole new identity, according to the
recipe of generic architecture that ignores the existing cultural
values. While on the long term, if there is no rejection of such
an identity as an old and already seen, it becomes a nuisance
and intrigue. ”Fig.4”

1
L. Sullivan: "Kindergarten Chats", Interstate Architect and Builder, 1901.
Figure 3. Avaz Twist Tower, Sarajevo
Both tendencies are aimed at creating a new identity, first
by uncritically and selectively creating architectural collage
that is a carrier of eligible cultural values, and the other
uncritically and indiscriminately appropriates global trends in
architecture. At a first glance, it does not seem to appear as
such, but in the long run, the first tendency also ignores the
promotion of cultural diversity because it offers no basis for
their evolutionary development, and so can easily lead to a
process of social and cultural homogenization.
The third tendency, starting from the value of the truth
that is found continuously, in regenerating role of culture
through the recognition and preservation of the evolutionary
basis for the promotion of cultural diversity, is at least present.
One reason for this situation is the fact that this tendency is the
most difficult one. It requires questioning and analysis within
the "process by which social actors build their own meaning
according to cultural attributes"2.
2
M. Castells: “The Power of Identity: The Information Age: Economy,
Society, and Culture”, Volume II, Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
Figure 4. Sarajevo City Centre at Marijin Dvor, Sarajevo
This engages also socially responsible role of architects. In this
transitional moment, where the first two tendencies are
dominant, such a role can be realized through an educational
process that starts with research. This process is certainly the
noblest and most time-consuming one.
For the case study in this paper we will take the building
of the Historical Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina
(formerly the Museum of the Revolution), built in 1963. The
aim is to show how the process of architectural
materialisation, and analysis of architectural materialisation
from a certain time distance, can not be one-dimensional, if
we, as individuals and architects want to take part in the
process of reification of cultural identity.
 V. CASE STUDY: HISTORICAL MUSEUM OF floating volume, which is achieved by its separation from the
BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA pedestal by modular grid of glass surfaces, which at the
entrance level very subtly connects visitors with the
environment. In such a way, its immediate environment
gained a clear entrance sequence, as an attractive part of the
public space and the opposite side of one intimate space of the
garden, which brings the museum activities in an active
relationship with nature. The inner atrium of the main corpus
of the building on the second floor forms the ideal "white
box", a dream of every curator for flexible display of works of
art of that period and the museum’s topics.

Synthesizing the main characteristics of the modern

Figure 5: Historical Museum entrance away from street
tendencies of the time, architects "silently" entered into the
existing urban context, illustrating the need for a redefinition
The architectural heritage of modernism in Bosnia and of cultural identity spontaneously, by a new time, whilst not
Herzegovina is valuable in many different ways. It shows a destroying it at the same time.
strong mark of the tendencies of its era, but also of signature
styles of renowned regional, European and even world-known Without insisting on the interior design, as Magaš said, they
architects. Mostly, these are buildings whose visual identity is made a memorial, one sign of the times, and "if we're lucky, it
often even ahead of its time. Leaning on urban and will remain a monument to a time and to the people to whom
architectural experience of the last periods (the Ottoman and it is dedicated." 4 Author believes that if we create an
Austro-Hungarian architecture), architectural modernism, architecture that does not match either our time or function, or
although autonomous and functions beyond spatial and the characterization of the construction site, it then gets out of
temporal realities, is the true bearer of cultural memory and the domain of truth. It takes an effort to realize
constructive creator of Bosnian national and cultural identity. characterization of space, form and given time, which tells the
truth of human creative works by using the clearest language
The specific combination of transcendentalism of build, transcending into a formative component.
modern architecture, and sensitivity towards history and
cultural heritage, is reflected in the building of Historical
Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina that is located within the
historic sensitive urban fabric of Sarajevo’s city center, the
Marijin Dvor area. ”Fig.5” Characteristic of Marijin Dvor is
its specific position within the city's linear structure, where it
works as a joint, a natural link between the historic center and
the modern city zone, between the old and the new.

”Fig.6” Architectural design of the Museum, designed by

the then young Croatian architects (B. Magaš, E. Šmidihen
and S. Horvat) in the beginning of their creative careers, was
based on a disciplined adoption of modernist practices not
only in the field of architecture, but also from the culture in
general. Architect Magaš stresses3 noticeable impact of the
Mondrian genius, whose two-dimensional geometric forms,
with clearly articulated colors in the composition was, and
even today are, an inspiration to many artists.

Such procedures are prominent in shaping the museum

space on the principles of reducing the expressive language of
the architectural and of autonomy of artistic form in respect to
the content. White, stone-lined cube, erected on a pedestal,
which also highlights the monumentality of the building, is
part of the universal formative vocabulary, which will later
appear in other centers of modernism. Such elevated main
exhibition space is also emphasized by the appearance of

3 4
Boris Magaš, from an interview in the “Svjetlo Riječi” magazine, May 2011 Boris Magaš, from an interview in the “Svjetlo Riječi” magazine, May 2011.
Figure 6: Historical Museum, View of exterior garden near entrance
Today the museum is completely neglected and even ignored
as an architectural monument and as cultural and educational
institutions. Historical Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina
today obviously exists in very poor physical condition, which
is a result of the lack of political decisiveness regarding
maintenance of the heritage of modernist architecture.
However, the management of the institution is trying to use
spatial resources for a variety of cultural activities
(exhibitions, educational workshops for children and adults,
bazaars, scientific research panel discussions and lectures),
which confirms that the area is able to house activities that are
complementary to its original purpose - affirmation of the
progressive tendencies that are contained in the program of the
museum but also in its architecture.
In order not to leave this pearl of Modernism in Sarajevo
to luck, it is necessary to acknowledge the needs of of policy
management and maintenance of the heritage of modernist
architecture and ways of their continuous and rational
adjustment to current needs. In this way, it will also gain a
possibility to show its potential and role in the formation of
Figure 7: Historical Museum, View from courtyard towards the street
contemporary local cultural identity. Because, as Mrduljaš
says, "deleting the tradition of modern architecture and the
ideas behind them will mean giving up the active and genuine
contribution to the global culture and leaving a provincial and
completely marginalized situation where local or universal
mean nothing."5 (Main lecturers, Vladimir Kulic, Cres / Fort
Lauderdale, May 2013).
This "non-significance" raises a big question mark on the
creative process of creating a space today. Only by adequate
training and encouraging young creators to critically reflect on
the current time and space, it will be possible to contribute to
redefining cultural identity through the art of building.
Example of Historical Museum of Bosnia and Herzegovina in
Sarajevo shows that "architecture, the most physically rooted
of the arts, bears the capacity to draw even sea potent
inspiration from its place."6
Therefore, this homage to the "modern heritage" should
be properly evaluated, and its potential in the formal and
functional terms maximally exploited.
5
Maroje Mrduljaš, Vladimir Kulić: „Unfinished modernisation“, Cres/Fort
Lauderale, May 2013.
6
L. Speck: “Regionalism and Invention”, Center, Vol. 3, 1987.
 Let us remember that the architecture is a testimony on
creativity of humans in the field of construction and every
moment that leads to its manifestation must be true. The truth
is what was, what is valuable, what we found, which creates
our memory, culture, identity and wealth. Without that there is
no truth, otherwise there is no identity, no culture, no space,
form, history, tradition, that tells the truth of human creative
works.
And without that truth there is no need for positive, for r-
evolutionary, that each local community progressively leads to
the progress.
VI. CONCLUSION
Using the example of the museum building many issues
that relate directly to the needs and ways of redefining cultural
identity intertwine, as well as the role of architecture in this
complex process.
Historical Museum by the period of its creation, in the
context of the historical development of Bosnian society,
belongs to the period of social transition-when the society,
after the World War II, the capitalist system of monarchy
exceeded into the system of socialist workers' self-government
within the former Yugoslavia. From the architectural point of
doctrine, it is a period in which the creative forces of
modernism were already weakened by the functionalist dogma
of the (post)industrial society. Observed within the narrow
context of heterogeneous Marijin Dvor site where it is located,
the building is very delicately interpolated into the existing
urban structure, not creating discontinuation but rather
conditions for further logical development of urban structures.
Within the presented analytical and comparative model where
the museum is observed through contextual multiplicity
(spatial and social, the place and time), it is evident that the
building of the museum in the architectural and cultural terms
thought through locally, but at the same time it remains
consistent with universal principles of the architectural
profession. The architects were able to take part in redefining
cultural identity while allowing it the continuity of the
attributes of flexibility and multiplicity, relying on their own
sensibility and freedom in the aesthetic and conceptual
approach.
It can be concluded that only those processes of
redefining cultural identity that are created within the third
tendency can enable exiting general social transition. But at
the same time they represent a creative challenge to the
architects as socially responsible artists-creators.
REFERENCES
[1] M. Auge: “Non-Places: An Introduction to Supermodernity, Verso,
2009.
[2] L. Sullivan in "Kindergarten Chats", Interstate Architect and Builder,
1901.
[3] M. Castells: “The Power of Identity: The Information Age: Economy,
Society, and Culture”, Volume II, Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
[4] B. Magaš, from an interview in the “Svjetlo Riječi” magazine, May
2011.
[5] M. Mrduljaš, V. Kulić: „Unfinished modernisation“, Cres/Fort
Lauderale, May 2013.
[6] L. Speck, Regionalism and Invention, Center, Vol. 3, 1987.